Suchergebnisse

Much of the literature on the emerging role of the EU as a non-proliferation actor has only a minimal engagement with theory. This collection aims to rectify this by placing the role of the EU in the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons within an analytical framework inspired by emerging literature on the performance of international organisations

"Greece and the European Union" published on by Oxford University Press.

In many cases, the European Union (EU) not only participates in the imposition of United Nations (UN) sanctions against states but actively sets the agenda and shapes their content, as a coercive means to bring a recalcitrant state into order especially when protracted negotiations fail to deliver. By default, this course of action constitutes an act of actorness, raising the international profile of the EU and signalling a significant presence in varying degrees in multilateral negotiations. However, some of these cases are also indications of limited effectiveness in the EU international interactions, revealing a considerable actorness-effectiveness gap. We account for this gap by reference to the bargaining power of the EU, identifying its key determinants that are related with the modality of EU engagement in multilateral diplomacy and revolve around the EU structural assets and institutional features as well as the bargaining environment. We use this analytical framework to account for the EU role in the negotiations over the Iranian nuclear program, questioning whether the imposition of sanctions do always indicate a strong EU international presence.

The EU in UN Politics -- Acknowledgements -- Contents -- About the Contributors -- Abbreviations -- List of Figures -- List of Tables -- 1 The EU in UN Politics: Analytical and Empirical Challenges -- 1.1 Introduction -- 1.2 The Analytical Framework of the Book -- 1.2.1 Parameters Conditioning the EU International Performance -- 1.3 Structure of the Book -- Note -- References -- 2 Speaking with One Voice: Easier Said than Done? The EU in the UNGA -- 2.1 Introduction -- 2.2 The EU at the UN: Empirical Observations -- 2.3 Theory: Preparing a Single Voice -- 2.4 An Empirical Plausibility Probe: EU Coordination in New York -- 2.5 Conclusions -- Notes -- References -- 3 The Politics of UNGA Resolution 65/276: A Tale of the EU Performance in the UNGA -- 3.1 Introduction -- 3.2 In Quest of a Single Voice in the UNGA -- 3.3 The EU in Action: How Did the EU Perform? -- 3.4 Conclusions -- Notes -- References -- 4 Evidence from the EU Presence at UNGA: In Pursuit of Effective Performance -- 4.1 Introduction -- 4.2 EU Output at UNGA -- 4.3 EU Outcome at UNGA -- 4.3.1 EU Oral Interventions -- 4.3.2 EU Voting Behavior -- 4.3.3 Sponsoring of Resolutions -- 4.3.4 An Assessment of Resolution 65/276 -- 4.4 Conclusions -- Notes -- References -- 5 The European Union in the United Nations: Coordination on Peacekeeping Missions -- 5.1 Introduction -- 5.2 An Overview of UN Peacekeeping Missions -- 5.2.1 The Range and Scope of UN Missions -- 5.2.2 The Role of the UNSC in Peacekeeping -- 5.2.3 The Role of the UNGA in Peacekeeping -- 5.3 The Role of the EU in UN Peacekeeping Operations -- 5.3.1 'Natural Partners' in Peacekeeping -- 5.3.2 Challenges and Limitations of EU-UN Collaboration -- 5.4 EU Voting Cohesion on Peacekeeping Operations in the UNGA -- 5.4.1 Voting Patterns of EU Member States on Peacekeeping Resolutions

The book assesses the EU performance in the broader UN setting after the Lisbon Treaty. Distinguished scholars with expertise in EU-UN relations use a comprehensive analytical framework of performance to examine various aspects of the complex EU engagement in UN politics. Performance goes beyond the achievement of agreed-upon objectives and engulfs the underlying, intra-organizational, agreement-reaching processes. The contributors examine the output of the intra-EU policy-making process and its impact within the UN setting. They cover thematic areas of special importance for the EU such as environment, human rights, disarmament and peacekeeping operations as well as special UN bodies and forums where the EU is particularly active, such as the UN General Assembly and its main Committees, the International Labour Organisation, UNESCO and the Non-Proliferation Review Conferences.--

This book examines the important role of the chairmanship office in multilateral negotiations within the UN setting. Although chairmanship is a generic feature of international politics, negotiations, and decision-making, it has been scarcely researched. The neutrality and impartiality assumptions that have been long associated with the chair have veiled the chair's potential in moulding negotiation outcomes. The authors seek to develop an analytical framework for the systematic study of the chairmanship office and its potential impact on multilateral negotiations. It elaborates on its origins, the parameters and conditions of chair's effectiveness, and the performance of the chair's functions. Focusing on the UN, this work seeks to go beyond existing accounts, offering further insights and extending the discussion beyond the Security Council. Without ignoring the pivotal importance of the Security Council, the book broadens the scope of analysis to other significant UN bodies and institutions including ad hoc Working Groups and several Conferences set up for specific international issues. Evaluating material from a wide range of sources and providing a deeper understanding of UN political dynamics, this work will appeal to scholars of the UN system, international organisations and global governance.

This book examines the important role of the chairmanship office in multilateral negotiations within the UN setting. Although chairmanship is a generic feature of international politics, negotiations, and decision-making, it has been scarcely researched. The neutrality and impartiality assumptions that have been long associated with the chair have veiled the chair's potential in moulding negotiation outcomes.The authors seek to develop an analytical framework for the systematic study of the chairmanship office and its potential impact on multilateral negotiations. It elaborates on it.

Regime complexes entail a variety of institutions with a degree of overlap in terms of thematic issues and participating actors. The EU is such an actor engaging with other governmental and non-governmental entities in the formation and evolution of regime complexes. In this article, we examine the role of the EU in the international transport regime complex, and more specifically in two of its core international organizations, namely ICAO and IMO. Our actor-based approach focuses on how the EU navigates between these two constitutive components of the global transport regime complex, advancing climate change mitigation measures. Our empirical material shows how the EU's active engagement in ICAO contributed to the organization's shift vis-à-vis the role of the aviation industry in greenhouse gas emissions. Besides the EU learning process that occurred and led to a more engaging and less conflictual EU approach in IMO, the ICAO achievement increased pressure and created a more conducive environment for the respective recognition of the maritime industry's share in climate deterioration. In this respect, the EU benefited from the structure of the transport regime complex to pursue its own preferences.

The European Union is broadly considered a benign reform actor, encouraging and supporting reforms in member states and beyond. However, European Union-induced reforms do not only generate the intended effects; they can also trigger unintended consequences for other reforms. These unintended consequences occur primarily through the impact of European Union-induced reforms on the resources available. The scope and size of the unintended effects will be conditioned by the domestic cycles in economic and public policy-making. Here, we apply our analytical framework to study the resilience of governance reforms in Greece during the period of fiscal consolidation (2010–2015), highlighting the unintended consequences of the European Union's 'reform actorness'. We find that the distinction between financial and non-financial resources is critical in unpacking the unintended consequences of any exogenously driven reform. Depending on the current stage in the cycles, the impact on non-financial resources can generate positive side-effects that help prevent other ongoing domestic reforms being derailed.