欧洲转型力量的重启:外部欧洲化的极限

本文旨在探讨现有的"欧洲化"方案究竟在何种程度上超越了欧盟边界,扩展至那些在国内制度的效率和民主合法性方面以"恶治"为特征的东部和东南部邻国。这些"欧洲周边国家"既无意愿、亦未必有能力调整自身以适应欧盟的要求,甚至缺乏入盟动力,不愿承担入盟成本。本文探究当将"欧洲化"概念和因果关联机制运用于此类国家时,需要在多大程度上进行进一步限定。笔者认为,只要欧盟不对那些它并不想接纳为成员的国家调整其"接近政策工具箱",就不太可能在其周边施展任何转型力量。欧盟在处理其与西巴尔干半岛国家和土耳其的关系时,已开始悄悄应用"走得更近但不接触"的方案,本文在结论部分将对这一方案的政策内涵做一反思。     

欧债危机背景下欧盟区域治理的法律基础——《财政契约》与《欧洲稳定机制条约》解析

欧盟既是一个以条约为基础的制度架构,也是一个拥有27个成员国的区域性国际组织。《欧洲经济与货币联盟稳定、协调和治理条约》（简称《财政契约》）是涉及欧洲政治、经济和法律的制度设计方案;《欧洲稳定机制条约》成为实施这一法律框架和原则的机制保障,在此基础上建立具有永久性救助功能的欧洲稳定机制。本文在对这两个法律文本解读的基础上,阐述欧债危机背景下欧盟区域的制度建设与创新。《财政契约》的达成将从立法层面进一步扩大欧盟超国家机构的治理领域,开启成员国让渡财政主权和金融监管权限的进程。这将为欧盟解决其成员国在财政和金融监管上长期各自为政等结构性问题提供法律为先的制度保障。     

欧盟对非洲制度机制调整及其对中国的影响

作为欧盟对非洲政策调整的重要组成部分,其制度机制自2007年里斯本峰会后,进行了重要的创新和调整。制度机制调整是欧盟在新的国际背景下,实现其更广泛的对非政策目标的基本保证。围绕欧盟原有对非制度机制中存在的条块分割、成员国缺乏协调以及欧非制度能力不对称等问题,欧盟对非制度机制的重要创新包括引入联合专家组和确立"主要协调国"的新的工作方式,同时加强了内部不同对非制度机制之间的统合。基于中国作为欧盟对非政策的主要牵动性因素,本文在分析欧盟对非制度机制调整背景以及调整的主要内容的基础上,重点论述了它对当前中国对非机制可能产生的影响与压力。     

比较视野下的欧盟政策制定与决策:理论与模式

欧洲一体化是人类历史上一种独特的政治合作现象,是民族国家把部分主权让渡给超国家机构,不断进行制度创新使一些特定领域拥有超国家管辖权的一个渐进过程。从这个意义上讲,制度创新与制度化是欧洲地区合作"模式"的一个重要特征。其制度设置及其决策机制就是欧盟运转的核心。然而,由于欧盟"超国家"与"政治体系"的双重属性,影响着研究者切入政策制定及决策的研究视角,加之欧盟的决策制度与机制不断变迁,致使其研究成为最为繁杂的一个议题。本文尝试梳理欧盟政策制定的现有理论与模式,在此基础上讨论建构一种综合性分析框架的可行性。     

“欧洲化”与政治社会学——欧盟安全与防务政策理论研究的新视角

与欧盟安全与防务政策取得的丰硕的实践成果相比,对该政策机制的理论研究相对滞后,直到近年来才出现繁荣的迹象。本文对欧盟安全与防务政策理论研究中的两种比较有代表性的理论视角——"欧洲化"和政治社会学进行评介:首先从欧盟安全与防务政策的"欧洲化"研究与一般"欧洲化"研究的区别、分析框架、存在的问题三个方面介绍"欧洲化"视角;其次从欧盟安全与防务场域及其发生学、防务超越民族国家三个方面介绍政治社会学视角;最后讨论在欧盟安全与防务政策理论研究中出现的不同于传统一体化研究的趋势。     

对欧盟未来文化建构的思考--一种对文化理念、概念与行动的表述

2002年12月在丹麦首都哥本哈根召开的欧盟首脑会议,正式宣布东欧12国为欧盟正式成员.这样,欧盟实现了第5次扩大,一个大的欧洲即将产生.欧盟各项法律与政策的逐渐统一,为欧洲的发展提供了制度平台.其中,对文化多样性与平等性的维护与发展,不仅为欧盟的东扩开拓了理念与概念空间,而且为未来"大欧洲"社会的形成与融合创造了条件.本文从"大欧洲"文化的理念、概念与实践三个方面对未来欧洲社会的前景进行了一些前瞻性的思考,力图从理论上寻求一定的文化建构与探索.     

希腊危机背景下欧盟金融监管制度建设及配套措施

金融危机和希腊主权债务危机加快了欧盟金融监管制度的创新和建设。本文在分析希腊主权债务危机产生的国内、国际根源及欧盟层面因素的基础上,阐述了欧盟在宏观和微观层面的金融监管制度建设:宏观层面有欧洲系统风险理事会;微观层面有欧盟层面和成员国层面构成的二级欧洲金融监管系统。欧盟的阶段性应急机制有"欧洲金融稳定机制"和"欧洲金融稳定基金"以及与之相配套的一系列监管措施。希腊危机和欧盟对之推出的制度性措施,为世界各国应对全球金融危机提供了经验和启示。     

欧债危机中的“德国角色”辨析

欧洲主权债务危机推动并放大了德国在欧盟的地位和作用。欧盟成员国出于不同的政策理念和利益诉求,对德国在危机中的表现持不同期待和评价,反映出巨大的认知差距。其中,"专制领导"、"犹豫领导"以及"法德主导"是三种典型认知。上述多重认知是欧盟制度缺陷、法德行为方式以及成员国利益分歧等一系列因素综合作用的结果。欧盟建设当前处于关键节点,德国如何应对上述认知,进行政策选择,对于欧盟建设至关重要。     

欧盟治理下社会伙伴的角色变化

欧盟/共同体层面的制度建设改变了社会伙伴的偏好、兴趣以及思想,将他们吸引到"欧洲社会共同体"中。社会伙伴在欧盟治理的传统模式——共同体方法下,发展社会对话、参与三方会谈并为立法提供咨询;在《马约》签订后,借助社会伙伴程序,社会伙伴享有了直接参与立法的权利;而在欧盟新型治理模式——开放式协调法下社会伙伴又与公民社会一道在欧盟的政策制定、政策实施和政策监督中发挥重要的作用。本文尝试对社会伙伴在标准立法程序、社会伙伴程序以及开放式协调法三种决策机制下的作用进行具体分析,力求从一个侧面反映欧盟治理的特征。     

欧盟在太空时代的角色生成:进程、挑战及启示

随着太空战略价值的上升,太空成为大国博弈的新疆域,太空时代特征日益明显。欧洲国家是较早进入太空的先驱。面对越来越激烈的国际竞争,欧洲国家于20世纪60年代开启在太空领域的合作,欧共体/欧盟机构的参与则开始于80年代。进入新世纪后,欧盟在太空领域的合作明显加快,在发布欧洲太空政策、欧洲太空产业政策和欧洲太空战略的同时,也实施了一系列共同的太空项目,欧盟的太空角色日益明显。本文从权威性、自主性、连贯性三个维度,重在剖析欧盟成为国际太空格局中的重要组成部分的历程及其面临的挑战。通过考察欧盟太空法律地位的确立、欧盟太空政策的制定和执行、欧盟对太空事务的管理及协调,本文认为,欧盟成为太空多极化时代重要一极的同时,也面临诸多挑战,凸显出欧盟在战略性领域采取集体行动的困难。这对于把握今后欧盟在太空领域乃至欧盟整体的发展态势具有重要意义。     

Over-efficiency in German EU Policy Coordination

The article refers to the controversial debate on the efficiency of German EU policy coordination. On the basis of a five-month participant observation in the German Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the hypothesis of the over-efficiency of EU coordination is developed. Over-efficiency is characterised by a functionally organised but purely technocratic preparation of EU policy without the participation of the general public, political parties, and national parliament. By having considerably increased the efficiency of EU policy coordination in recent years, German policy makers have therefore potentially undermined the acceptance of European integration as a whole.     

Between national and European foreign policy: the role of Latvia and Romania in the EU’s policy towards Central Asia

This article explores whether and to what extent new member states of the European Union (EU) seek to pursue their national foreign policy goals towards Central Asia through the EU rather than bilaterally. To do so, it focuses on Latvia and Romania. While the article finds evidence of Romanian attempts to project its interests in the region onto the EU level, Latvia appears to rely more extensively on the EU level to pursue its goals towards Central Asia. Using insights from the literature on Europeanization of national foreign policy, the article explains this finding with reference to four variables that determine whether a member state will seek to upload its national foreign policy preferences onto the EU level, namely the perceived salience of the policy goals, the extent to which member states can carve out a niche, their perceived capabilities and the level of Europeanization of their national foreign policies.     

The Limits of Normative Power Europe in Asia: The Case of Human Rights in China

In recent years an increasing number of works on EU international actorness have begun to focus on notions of “normative, value-driven external policy”. However, the majority of these works tend to uncritically analyse EU foreign policy without considering its internal complexity and the existing national, supranational and intergovernmental dynamics. This paper first sheds light on these issues by proposing an original theoretical and analytical framework to study European, rather than merely EU, normative foreign policy. Secondly, this paper attempts to empirically apply such a framework in the specific case of European human rights promotion in China. What emerges is that in the case of China, and Asia more broadly, Europe appears more as a normative trap, where the interaction of EU institutions and member states originate policies not in line with the EU human rights normative basis.     

欧洲政治一体化的发展与前瞻

欧洲政治一体化经历了"欧洲政治合作"、"共同外交与安全政策"以及"共同安全与防务政策"三个发展阶段,使欧洲国家外交政策的合作越来越紧密。然而因各国外交利益的不同道致欧洲外交政策无法步调一致,因此影响了欧洲联盟对国际事务的影响力。《里斯本条约》改变了欧洲联盟传统的外交与安全体系,创造了一个"金三角、两系统"的新格局,亦即建构"新人事制度"、"新外交决策体系"与"新外交行政体系"等,使欧洲联盟外交与安全体系焕然一新。这种新格局下可能创造出来的外交能量,极可能增强欧盟的外交能力,使欧洲联盟成为更具影响力的全球角色,这项变革将大大增加欧洲联盟成为国际政治新强权的实力,未来欧盟亦将因此对国际体系发挥前所未有的影响力,以上发展值得深入研究与观察。     

Why the EU Still Matters in Turkish Domestic Politics: Insights from Recent Reforms in Migration Policy

Abstract

In view of Turkey’s increasing distance from the European Union (EU), the continued partial alignment with EU standards is often attributed either to domestic factors, or to diffusion processes induced by external actors other than the EU. However, based on interviews with officials from Turkey and the European Commission on recent reforms in migration policy, this article argues that two factors are responsible for continued EU influence on policy processes. First, the EU is still able to set incentives for compliance. Second, the instrument for pre-accession assistance has an impact that goes beyond that of a mere facilitator of domestically defined interests.     

The Duty to Assist and Its Disincentives: The Shipping Industry and the Mediterranean Migration Crisis

The role of commercial ships in the Mediterranean migration crisis is little-noticed in the media and by the general public, and largely disregarded in the EU’s political responses to the crisis. Whereas large-scale national and regional actions such as the Italian-administered Mare Nostrum and the EU’s Frontex-administered Triton operations have become part of the vocabulary surrounding the crisis, the rescue of 42,000 migrants by commercial vessels in 2014 – and the implications thereof – is rarely commented upon. More importantly, the commercial shipping industry is rendered invisible in the EU policy responses to the Mediterranean migration crisis, which disregards both the efforts and challenges experienced by the industry. For this reason, this profile zooms in on the migration crisis from the point of view of commercial shipping, and argues that it is of fundamental importance that European policy responses to the crisis tackle the multiple disincentives experienced by the commercial shipping industry towards upholding the duty to render assistance to vessels in distress at sea. The concrete policy actions suggested here answer to the challenges experienced by the commercial shipping industry; aid the industry in its efforts to undertake its legal and moral duty to render assistance; and, in effect, save more lives at sea.     

The Missing Link in the EU's Nascent Strategic Approach toward Asia: Military Diplomacy

The Lisbon Treaty enacted in 2009 allows the European Union (EU) to adopt a foreign, security, and defense policy with a higher profile. In particular, the High Representative and the European External Action Service are now in a position to conduct a continuous conversation with China, India, Japan, and ASEAN beyond trade-oriented dialogues. But a genuine strategic approach toward Asia requires military expertise so as to adequately assess how to best contribute to stability in this part of the world. Military diplomacy involving individual member states already takes place, yet virtually no information is shared at the EU level. The adoption of a full-fledged strategic approach toward Asia would not only be politically astute and make excellent economic sense; it can also consolidate EU institutions in the realm of foreign, security and defense policy.     

Swiss Energy Policy and the Challenge of European Governance

The European Union establishes external relations with third countries in different ways. Network governance is considered as an organisational opening that provides for more cooperative flexibility and inclusion. In this article, I examine to what extent network governance enables Switzerland's inclusion in the European energy sector. I argue that, as the network governance of EU energy policy becomes more institutionalized – from the regulatory forums of Florence and Madrid to the European Regulators Group for Electricity and Gas (ERGEG) – Switzerland tends to be excluded. I further argue that this lack of political inclusion is partly compensated by patterns of market governance that favor Swiss firms. Neither network nor market governance, however, is a sufficient form of coordination and traditional options such as bilateral agreements (electricity) and autonomous adaptation (gas) seem inevitable.     

Conditioned Networking: Swiss–EU Relations in Transport

This article addresses the structural characteristics of the interactions between Switzerland and the EU in the transport sector, i.e. transport by air and land. More precisely, it is focused on two different aspects of this relationship: first the modes of coordination between Switzerland and the EU according to the concept of external governance and, second, those conditions that make inclusive patterns of interaction more likely. The central finding of this case study is an expansion of both the regulatory and organisational boundary in both cases. This shift finds expression in the incorporation of Swiss actors into a variety of networks that, at least in some cases, allow Swiss actors to shape EU policy making. The actual patterns of interaction are influenced by a number of factors, including the type of governance inside the EU that facilitates the inclusion of third parties in EU external governance and the problem structure that is characterized by coordination rather than enforcement problems.     

‘Schloss Neuwahnstein’? Why the Länder continue to strengthen their representations in Brussels

The establishment of representative offices in Brussels marked the start a qualitative new step in the engagement of the German Länder in European Union (EU) policy. Despite a contested birth, more than 20 years' operation in Brussels have seen these offices become full elements of the sponsoring Länder administrations. This article argues that in both functional and operational terms, the Brussels Länder offices have developed over time to approximate the role played by their federal level counterparts, the Länder representations in Berlin. Enhanced investment by the Länder in their EU presence underscores the increasing relevance of EU issues for the exercise of their domestic policy responsibilities. However, the Länder offices in Brussels remain disputed entities, as federal and Länder government views of their mission and appropriate engagement differ sharply. Thus, while direct engagement in Brussels has become the norm for the Länder administrations, tensions over access to the EU sphere continue to mark Bund-Länder relations in Brussels – more that ten years after a legal solution was established. The article concludes by considering the broader implications of this situation.