Refine
Document Type
- Article (7)
- Part of a Book (3)
- Editorship book (1)
- Working Paper (1)
Language
- English (12)
Has Fulltext
- no (12)
Keywords
- Brexit (2)
- Strategic Compass (2)
- CFSP (1)
- Council Presidency (1)
- Defence (1)
- Differentiated integration (1)
- Differentiation (1)
- Disintegration (1)
- EU Council Presidency (1)
- EU foreign policy (1)
- EU-UK relations (1)
- Eastern enlargement (1)
- European Neighbourhood Policy (1)
- European Union (1)
- European security (1)
- Functions of Presidency (1)
- High Representative (1)
- High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (1)
- Institutional changes (1)
- Libya Contact Group (1)
- Lisbon Treaty (1)
- Multiple Streams Approach (1)
- Normandy Format (1)
- PESCO (1)
- Poland (1)
- Principal-agent approach (1)
- QMV (1)
- Three-tier approach (1)
- Ukraine (1)
- Ukraine War (1)
- United Kingdom (1)
- differentiated cooperation (1)
- differentiated integration (1)
- discretion (1)
- enlargement (1)
- entrepreneurial strategies (1)
- foreign and security policy (1)
- fragmentation (1)
- informal governance (1)
- policy change (1)
- policy entrepreneurs (1)
- supranational agents (1)
The volume deals with the impact of the EU on the Polish state and governance. Contributors from Politics and Law explore transformation processes, which are influenced by the EU, took place in the legal system, party landscape and various policy fields in Poland. The authors analyze amongs others counterterrorism policy, climate and energy policy, foreign policy as well as gender equality policy of Poland. In addition, the transformation processes in the Polish judiciary, interest representation and parties are discussed.
The purpose of the chapter is to show how European integration has influenced Polish foreign policy after the accession and it does so by using the Europeanisation approach. The first section addresses the methodological challenges regarding the application of the Europeanisation concept for studying national foreign policies and gives an insight into the state of the art concerning the empirical studies on Polish diplomacy. The second section examines the EU’s impact on Polish diplomacy within the case study of the policy towards the eastern neighbours and identifies factors which played a role by re-shaping Polish diplomacy after the accession. The final section summarises the findings and deals with the question of how European Polish foreign policy became and what the reasons were for the change within this particular case study.
The point of departure of this article is limited systematic research on the rotating EU Council Presidency after the Lisbon Treaty. In order to assess rotating presidencies the paper proposes a three-tier approach which includes a functional, a behavioural and a contingency dimension. These dimensions are supplemented by the institutional changes of the Lisbon Treaty referring to the rotating presidencies. Next, the paper applies this evaluation framework to the Polish Presidency that took place in the second half of 2011. Finally, it draws conclusions from the Polish case for both the leadership capacity of the rotating Council Presidency in the post-Lisbon European Union and the performance of Poland’s EU Council Presidency.
Polish Role in Shaping the EU Foreign and Security Policy during its Council Presidency in 2011
(2015)
Poland, being the biggest country among the new Member States, has a well-defined foreign policy interest, particularly towards the Eastern neighbourhood. This article examines the involvement of Polish Presidency of the Council in the development of the foreign and security policy of the European Union. Considering the serious limitations placed on the role of the rotating Presidency in the post-Lisbon institutional framework, the analysis investigates the patterns of action Poland followed, which involved the providing of the operational backup for the High Representative as well as bringing its own contributions to the agenda of the Foreign Affairs Council. As the article demonstrates, the rotating Presidency can still redound to the further development of the foreign and security policy.
Brexit initially raised the prospect of new forms of external differentiation in the European Union (EU), should the United Kingdom continue to participate in a number of the Union’s policy areas. Security and defence was one area where agreement on the terms of UK participation was more likely, given the clear interests of both sides in the development of a close partnership in this area. But agreement has been so difficult to reach, and the final Brexit deal makes no mention of collaboration in foreign, security and defence policy. We argue that the key to understanding this puzzle lies in understanding the politics of differentiated disintegration, of which Brexit is the prime example, and the distinction between strategic and political interests. While strategic interests constitute a driver for external differentiation, the political interests arising from the withdrawal process make it difficult to reach an agreement. Divorcing strategic cooperation from the short-term politics of negotiations is the first step to overcoming the stalemate, and this chapter presents several ways this can be achieved. By perceiving Brexit as a case of differentiated disintegration, this chapter accounts for the significant constraints associated with external differentiation as a mode of integration in the EU.
This working paper examines the European Union's (EU) strategic partnerships with International Organisations (IOs) in dealing with different crises. Through the lens of three distinct case studies, it investigates the EU's collaboration with the United Nations in addressing the Mali crisis, its joint efforts with NATO in response to the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine, and its partnership with the African Union in the context of climate change.
While the standard conceptualization of differentiation in the European Union (EU) focuses on differentiated integration, scholars devote less attention to differentiated cooperation. This article argues, on the contrary, that member states’ engagement in differentiated efforts in EU foreign policy manifest themselves both in the form of differentiated integration and cooperation. It elaborates an original conceptual framework for exploring differentiated cooperation as a mode of governance. Drawing on the articles in this special issue, this introduction maps empirical manifestations of differentiated cooperation in various areas and dimensions of EU foreign policy. The results of the special issue show that differentiated cooperation has mostly manifested itself in informal patterns of cooperation, with the treaty-based mechanisms being limited. As such, the special issue reflects the differentiation and informalization processes occurring not only in the EU, but also in global governance more broadly.
Research on differentiated integration has flourished in recent years, highlighting the political and efficiency gains to be had from selective participation and third country engagement in EU policy areas. Proposals for an EU-UK security and defence agreement represented a paradigmatic example of differentiated disintegration, for which both strategic and political prospects initially appeared positive, yet which ultimately foundered on the back of the EU’s reluctance to create new third country models and subsequent political upheaval in the UK. This Article asks why these proposals failed and what this can tell us about the politics of differentiated (dis)integration, focusing on the referendum to the recent Ukraine crisis, and drawing on several elite interviews conducted with policymakers in London and Brussels. It shows that while the strategic benefits of differentiation increased following the Brexit vote, the growing concern in Brussels for the precedent set by Brexit, the collapse of issue-specific dynamics into a singular concern for UK “cherry picking”, and the rightward shift in UK politics occasioned by the Brexit negotiations all undermined the prospects for a differentiated outcome in security and defence. The Ukraine crisis, while precipitating significant changes in many European states, had thus far failed to alter the new status quo locked in after Brexit.
Informal groupings have proliferated in EU foreign policy over the past decade, despite the enhanced role of the High Representative tasked with ensuring the coherence of this policy domain under the Lisbon Treaty. This article analyzes how the decision of select EU member states to act on certain policy issues through informal groupings, bypassing the EU framework, affects the High Representative’s room for maneuver. Drawing on the principal-agent model, the emergence of informal groupings is conceptualized as a manifestation of pathological delegation, which undermines High Representative’s role. The findings reveal two factors that may nevertheless increase the agent’s discretion in cases of delegation anomalies: the low heterogeneity of member state preferences toward the informal grouping and the interaction between agents in the same domain, facilitating agent’s performance. By examining agent's discretion when delegation anomalies arise, the article may be useful for scholars investigating delegation and agency in international organizations.