Suchergebnisse

Cover -- Outline Contents -- Detailed Contents -- List of Boxes, Figures, Images and Tables -- List of Abbreviations -- Preface: The Fascination and Frustration of Studying a Key Institution -- Part I: The European Council: Overview and History -- 1 Introduction: The Many Faces of the European Council -- In the spotlight -- A look at the legal texts: some basic institutional features -- The real world: activities, agreements and acts -- Shifting the institutional balance: trends in the EU's architecture -- Inside the European Council: the puzzle of consensus formation -- Conclusion: puzzles for a hybrid institution -- 2 Multiple Approaches for Understanding a Contested Institution Three Models -- The presidency model: at the top of the institutional hierarchy -- The council model: towards communitarisation -- The fusion model: the European Council as the dominant multilevel player -- Conclusion: a lively debate -- 3 Pre-History: The Birth of Institutionalised Summitry -- Historical perspectives: from a long-term perspective towards a close-up view -- Emergence: reasons for institutionalised summitry -- Establishment: the making of a new institution -- Conclusion: an enabling compromise -- 4 History: Generations of Leaders and the Institutional Trajectory -- Five generations of leaders -- The institutional trajectory of the European Council: incremental evolution to full treaty status -- Conclusion: patterns of continuity -- Part II: The Role of the European Council within the EU Architecture -- 5 Political and Procedural Leadership: General Functions and Specific Powers -- Functions in the EU's policy cycle -- Elective functions: the power as an electoral body -- Institutional and procedural arrangements: the power of incremental engineering -- Procedures for suspension and withdrawal: the power of exclusion.

AS THE COUNTRIES OF THE EUROPEAN UNION MOVE TOWARD A COMMON CURRENCY IN THE YEAR 1999, JITTERS HAVE GRIPPED PARTS OF THE EUROPEAN LEFT THAT SEE IN THIS PROCESS THE TWILIGHT OF DEMOCRATIC POPULAR SOVEREIGNTY AND THE DAWN OF THE REIGN OF EUROCRACY. THIS ARTICLE STATES THAT "NOSTALGIC NATIONALISM" IS NO ANSWER TO THE CHALLENGES FACING THE EUROPEAN EXPERIMENT. FURTHERMORE, TO IDENTIFY THE NATION-STATE AS THE PRIVILEGED SITE OF DEMOCRATIC SELF-DETERMINATION AND SOCIAL JUSTICE IS NEITHER CONCEPTUALLY NOR INSTITUTIONALLY CONVINCING. EMERGING OUT OF A CUSTOMS UNION AND BORDER AGREEMENTS AMONG A HANDFUL OF EUROPEAN COUNTRIES, WHAT WAS NAMED THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COMMUNITY HAS EVOLVED INTO ONE OF THE MORE INTERESTING MULTINATIONAL CONFEDERATIONS IN MODERN POLITICAL HISTORY. THE EUROPEAN LEFT SHOULD NOT HARKEN AFTER THE DISCREDITED NATIONALISMS OF THE PAST BUT USE ITS IMAGINATION TO THINK UP NEW INSTITUTIONS OF DEMOCRATIC SELF-DETERMINATION FOR A POSTNATIONAL EUROPE. THE ARTICLE LISTS SEVERAL IDEAS WHICH WOULD BE STEPS IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

AbstractWhile the possibility ofEuropean disintegration is prominently on the public agenda,EuropeanUnion (EU) studies have so far largely neglected the issue. This article looks for a proper theoretical starting point to conceptualize and explainEuropean disintegration. Theories aboutEuropean integration, but also international politics, comparative federalism, optimum currency areas and imperial decline appear to be problematic bases to this end. Some of these theories suffer from a state bias. Other theories are too narrowly focused to explain the complex process of disintegration. Yet others fail to interconnect coherently the manifold disintegrative factors. A theoretical framework on polity formation developed by Bartolini is the most promising basis from which to examineEuropean disintegration as it avoids the problems just mentioned. It shows that Eurosceptic dissatisfaction mainly induces partial exits within theEUdue to theEU's weak lock‐in power, its problematic voice structuring and the lack of proper full exit options.

The concept of "European digital sovereignty" does not seem to fit well with the global nature of digitalisation, but a closer look at the phenomenon reveals why this term makes sense. First of all, digitalisation is not a process antithetical to territorialisation, contrary to the logic of states or incompatible with the defence of the interests of the European Union, especially at a time when the digital space has become a geostrategic battlefield between countries and, above all, different models. The proposal advocated here consists of understanding this term not only as an ad intra protection but also as a capacity to assert the European model of digitisation on a global scale.