Suchergebnisse

This book examines the motivations for the European Union's (EU) policy towards the Common Market of the South (Mercosur), the EU's most important relationship with another regional economic integration organisation. It argues that the dominant explanations in the literature - balancing the US, global aspirations, being an external federator, long-standing economic and cultural ties, economic interdependence, and the Europeanization of Spanish and Portuguese national foreign policies - fail to explain the EU's policy. These accounts tend to infer the EU's motives from its activity. Drawing from primary documents, this monograph argues that major developments in the relationship - the 1992 Inter-institutional Agreement and the 1995 Europe Mercosur Inter-regional Framework Cooperation Agreement - were initiated by Mercosur and supported mainly by Spain. This means that rather than the EU pursuing a strategy, as implied by most of the existing literature, the EU was largely responsive

Los acuerdos entre la Unión Europea (UE) y América Latina se han desarrollado desde los años noventa en etapas económicas dispares por diversos motivos. Los primeros, como el Acuerdo con Chile o el Acuerdo con México, se produjeron en circunstancias económicas de crecimiento en la UE, con una estabilidad política mundial en aumento desde el final de la Guerra Fría, y con Estados Unidos como principal competidor comercial. Sin embargo, desde finales de la década de 2000, las sucesivas crisis económicas creadas por la crisis financiera, la del euro, el ascenso del euroescepticismo, la pandemia, la vuelta al proteccionismo y la consolidación de China a escala internacional —poniendo fin a la unipolaridad hegemónica de Estados Unidos— implica que la UE necesita más que nunca desarrollar acuerdos de asociación con otras regiones y países, incluyendo a los de América Latina y el Caribe. De hecho, cabe considerar que, si la UE no es capaz de establecer acuerdos con países con valores económicos y políticos similares a los suyos, apenas tendrá posibilidades de suscribir otros con países distintos; porlo que su futuro económico podría estar en una situación delicada.

Gibraltar provided the first outcome of the Brexit referendum with 96% voting against it in June 2016. This outcome, together with the impact of the exit of the UK from the European Union, recently brought the attention of the British media to this part of the Mediterranean. Other countries with border issues that will be affected by Brexit obviously include the Republic of Ireland, and the Republic of Cyprus, if we take into consideration the British bases in the Republic of Cyprus Akrotiri and Dhekelia. Gibraltar, like other British Overseas Territories, is of strategic importance for both the current and for a post-Brexit British Foreign Policy. The British bases in Cyprus for example are also of considerable geopolitical importance especially considering that Cyprus is not a member of NATO, but Spain joined the North-Atlantic Alliance in 1982 during the negotiations of its membership to the EU (European Community at that time). However, there are several issues of mainly a political nature that places Gibraltar in an exceptional situation. The discussion over Gibraltar between the UK and Spain started with the Utrecht Treaty in 1713 when the disagreement over the sovereignty of the isthmus took place. Since then, and ongoing during the 20th century, other events such as the development of the airport over territory that is considered by Spain to be their own, has added another layer to this long-standing problem.

The development of an EU identity should be supported by a legal framework to be able to justify its legitimation. Following the work of Ian Manners on normative power, this paper discusses the links between key aspects of EU values such as solidarity and human rights in a context where supporters of nation-states and Westphalian views of states have recently dominated European politics. This has had a a direct impact (or lack of) on the promotion of multiculturalism. This paper takes Greece as an example of how the EU's approach towards this country could have been a display of solidarity and promotion of human rights but it missed the opportunity. One of the reasons for favouring a more utilitarian approach could be linked to the lack of sense and belonging to the EU society as a consequence of the barriers created by strong feelings of nationalism attached to European states and nations together with a lack of promotion of multiculturalism. It is argued that a more multicultural society could benefit from the creation of an EU identity and consequently, the creation of an EU society, EU policies, and potentially, the avoidance of future European crisis such as the one created with Brexit.

Since the creation of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) in 1947 and its replacement with the World Trade Organisation (WTO) in 1994, the main goal of the organisation has been the facilitation of trade between countries, by decreasing barriers among the now 164 members and covering 98% of international trade. The role of the US and the EU within the WTO negotiations, has been interpreted as them being the dominating players, until the Doha Round that started in 2001. It has not been finished in part due to the disagreement between several countries with the US and the EU. The position of the UK after Brexit, will likely be weaker as a negotiator within the context of the WTO, because it cannot compete individually against them and also, against other big and relatively new members such as China (2001) and Russia (2012).

Brexit means Brexit for the UK, we have voted for a border away from the EU, but what if you're a small overseas territory that's technically part of Britain and you don't want this? Dr Arantza Gomez-Arana discusses the history of 'The Rock', her latest research and why the people there really don't want a hard border.

The development of an EU identity would be supported by a legal framework to be able to justify its legitimation. Following the work of Ian Manners on normative power, this paper discusses the links between key aspects of EU values such as solidarity and human rights in a context where supporters of nation-states and Westphalian views of states have recently dominated European politics. This has had a direct impact on the (or lack of) promotion of multiculturalism. This paper takes Greece as an example of how the EU's approach towards this country could have been a display of solidarity and promotion of human rights but it missed the opportunity. One of the reasons for favouring a more utilitarian approach could be linked to the lack of sense and belonging to the EU society as a consequence of the barriers created by strong feelings of nationalism attached to European states and nations together with a lack of promotion of multiculturalism. It is argued that a more multicultural society could benefit from the creation of an EU identity and consequently, the creation of an EU society, EU policies, and potentially, the avoidance of future European crisis such as the one created with Brexit.

This book provides a distinctive and empirically rich account of the European Union's relationship with the Common Market of the South (Mercosur). It seeks to examine the motivations that determine the EU's policy towards Mercosur; the most important relationship the EU has with another regional economic integration organization. In order to investigate these motivations (or lack thereof), this study examines the contribution of the main policy- and decision-makers, the European Commission and the Council of Ministers, as well as the different contributions of the two institutions. It analyses the development of EU policy towards Mercosur in relation to three key stages. Arana argues that the dominant explanations in the literature fail to adequately explain the EU's policy, in particular, these accounts tend to infer the EU's motives from its activity. Rather than the EU pursuing a strategy, as implied by most of the existing literature, the EU was largely responsive, which explains why the relationship is much less developed than the EU's relations with other parts of the world.

Justice and Home Affairs is one of the fastest expanding areas of research in European Studies. The European response to security concerns such as terrorism, organised crime networks, and drug trafficking as well as to the challenge of managing migration flows are salient topics of interest to an increasing number of scholars of all disciplines, the media and general public. This handbook takes stock of policy development and academic research in relation to justice and home affairs and analyses the field in an unprecedented thematic depth. The book comprehensively investigates the field from the perspective of the three dimensions central to European integration: the sectoral (policies), the horizontal (states, regions) and the vertical (institutions, decision-making) dimensions. It also discusses the most important theoretical approaches used in this research area and provides the reader with a state of the art picture of the field. By adopting such a comprehensive and broad-based approach, the handbook is uniquely positioned to be an important referent for scholars, practitioners and students interested in the area of justice, home affairs and European politics.

This article discusses the association agreement between the European Union and Central America signed in 2010.The importance of this agreement is crucial in international relations since it is the first successful association agreement between two regional groups that include trade, political dialogue and development aid. The central argument of this article sustains that the agreement was possible thanks to the efforts of the Spanish diplomatic team. However, this was not sufficient and the efforts of Central American countries were absolutely essential. The main events that influenced the agreement are analysed in order to find the reasons behind the agreement: the Spanish presidency; the bananas conflict between the EU, the US and Central American countries; and the political conflict in Honduras.

This article discusses the association agreement between the European Union and Central America signed in 2010.The importance of this agreement is crucial in international relations since it is the first successful association agreement between two regional groups that include trade, political dialogue and development aid.The central argument of this article sustains that the agreement was possible thanks to the efforts of the Spanish diplomatic team. However, this was not sufficient and the efforts of Central American countries were absolutely essential. The main events that influenced the agreement are analysed in order to find the reasons behind the agreement: the Spanish presidency; the bananas conflict between the EU, the US and Central American countries; and the political conflict in Honduras.

The first attempt to secure an association agreement between the European Union (EU) and the Mercosur ended unsuccessfully in October 2004. In 2010, the EU launched a second attempt to reach an association agreement with Mercosur. This second attempt to secure an association agreement presented new obstacles, including: the current economic crisis; the accession of ten new member state countries; the restrictions Argentina has imposed on EU exports; the lack of progress made in terms of developing Mercosur into an integrated political-economic.This paper argues that the association agreement can more accurately be explained as being the result of Spain and Portugal particular interest, and the use of among other actions the "momentum" created by the Spanish presidency of the EU.