Suchergebnisse

Furness, Mark: Exporting the security community? The EU and regional security cooperation in the Meditrerranean. - S. 5-26. Delcour, Laure: Shaping the post-soviet space? The EU, region-building and interregionalism in CIS countries. - S. 27-48. Van Damme, Steven: The European Union as a post-modern security actor? Defence reform in the Democratic Republic of Congo. - S. 49-66. Revelas, Kyriakos: The EU as a security policy actor and EU relations with South-East Asia. - S. 67-79. Mesquita Cela, Eleonora: The new approach of the European Union towards the Mercosur and the strategic partnership with Brazil. - S. 81-96. De Cock, Geert: Contrasting the US strategy of "competitive liberalisation" in the FTAA negotiations with the EU's neighbourhood policy. A test case for a constructivist analysis of multilateralism. - S. 97-114. Ondarza, Nicolai von: EU military development - an executive prerogative? Decision-making and parliamentary control on the use of force by the EU. - S. 115-136. Knudsen, Morten: The EU, the UN and effective multilateralism. The case of UN reform. - S. 137-153. Aoun, Elena: Beyond EU/US early contentions over the International Criminal Court. The development of the EU's loyality to the ICC. - S. 155-171. Ambast, Rohit and Vinay Tyagi: Ambassadors of Europe. An insight into the evolution of the European Union and international diplomatic law. - S. 173-189

The 2015 Paris Agreement adopted at the twenty-first Conference of the Parties (COP) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) constitutes a major landmark in the combat against climate change. However, international climate governance and the climate deal have been confronted with concerns about their legitimacy and accountability. In the same vein, while the combat against climate change also takes centre stage in the EU's inter-regional relations, the EU's approach has suffered from democratic deficits as well. Literature on parliamentary diplomacy and interregionalism has pointed at the potential of inter-parliamentary assemblies' monitoring and deliberation functions in addressing the legitimacy gap of intergovernmental agreements. This article puts the focus on the Parliamentary Assembly of the Union for the Mediterranean and climate change, and analyses to what extent and how the Assembly fulfills these monitoring and deliberation functions. In doing so, the article aims to examine how inter-parliamentary assemblies can contribute to the legitimacy of the EU's inter-regional approach to climate change. The analysis is based on quantitative and qualitative text analysis, in-depth semi-structured interviews and participatory observation. The conclusion reads that, while the Parliamentary Assembly of the UfM (PA-UfM) has indeed used its monitoring and deliberative functions, there are several limitations related to the asymmetry between the EU and its Southern and Eastern Mediterranean partner countries, that hamper its potential contribution to add legitimacy to the Union for the Mediterranean's (UfM) climate action.
Climate change, legitimacy, European Union, monitoring, deliberation, inter-regionalism, parliamentary diplomacy, inter-parliamentary cooperation, energy, Mediterranean

EU and China are the global powers that can affect and alter international relations at the political, economic, and societal levels. While the EU shapes the foreign policy in Europe, China has a critical role in Asian politics. In Asia-Europe interregionalism and interregional relations, the EU-China relations are essential in consolidating global and regional stability. However, in the current political conjuncture, the security issues in cyberspace challenge both actors. Hence, cybersecurity and digitalization policies are a potential conflict area in EU-China relations. As the impact of technological and digital developments increases on the global political economy, global powers are developing policies to breast the tape in technological development. The European Commission has set "A Europe fit for the digital age" as one of its priorities for the 2019-2024 term. Meanwhile, since 2015 China has been promoting the Digital Belt and Road Initiative to foster digital connectivity among the Belt and Road countries. However, big data analytics are important in developing new technologies, especially in digital connectivity, automation, and robotics. In this context, data governance has become a geopolitical concept in international relations. Consequently, differences between China's and the EU's approach to data – access, process, and collection – may result in geopolitical confrontations. In this paper, we argue that both actors should involve civil society in the policymaking process to address the dynamics of information technologies, cooperate on adapting a global approach and avoid geopolitical confrontations. Civil society organizations can help the actors understand the underlying risks in cybersecurity and form a non-conflicting approach in data governance frameworks. Furthermore, while investigating the EU and China's data governance models, we shed light upon the role of civil society organizations in addressing the potential risks and opportunities in cyberspace. Finally, we conclude our paper with policy recommendations for China and the EU to cooperate in cyberspace by involving civil society organizations.
Received: 18 May 2022Accepted: 25 July 2022