This article aims at problems of legitimacy, sovereignty & decision-making process in the context of European integration. Several concepts of legitimacy & sovereignty are introduced & subsequently analyzed in the context of latest development of the European Union. Adapted from the source document.
Due to the different and mutually incompatible interpretations of Article X of the Treaty of Utrecht of 1713, there is still an ongoing dispute between the United Kingdom and the Kingdom of Spain on the question of the sovereignty of Gibraltar. In the United Kingdom's view, which is largely shared by legal scholars, Article X of the Treaty of Utrecht grants full and entire sovereignty over Gibraltar to the UK. Meanwhile, the Kingdom of Spain argues that Article X yielded to the crown of Great Britain only the property of Gibraltar's castle, town and port. Sovereignty over Gibraltar, however, continued to be retained by the Spanish state. In spite of their disagreement, both states started negotiating a form of condominium at the beginning of the 21st century. In the end, they failed to achieve this goal, which seems to be incompatible with the UN General Assembly resolutions on the decolonization of Gibraltar. The people of Gibraltar, who are the third actor in the Spanish-British dispute, claim their own sovereignty and their right to self-determination. However, according to the UN General Assembly, the decolonization of Gibraltar requires as a precondition that the Kingdom of Spain and the UK solve their dispute on the question of sovereignty. Otherwise the decolonization of Gibraltar cannot occur. Both the United Kingdom and the Kingdom of Spain are European Union members but their inter-state dispute under international law cannot be solved within the EU context. Thus, three hundred years after the signature of the Treaty of Utrecht, the future of Gibraltar remains completely unclear. Adapted from the source document.
The article compares the foreign energy strategies of the EU and the PRC on the African continent within the context of the efforts of ensuring the diversifiction of the supply of fossil fuels. Both actors are connecting some sets of values to their strategies, and these values are integral to their perception of the international environment. The main purpose of the article is to compare these strategies, especially in the context of the values that are connected with them -- e.g. state sovereignty, human rights, and social responsibility -- and the impact of these values on the form of the energetic strategies. While the EU urges normative values such as democratic government, human rights and quality public domain management, the PRC adheres to the values of non-interference, state sovereignty and, last but not least, the principle of "One China". Despite the fact that, rhetorically, the two actors share some of the same principles, they are applied differently by each actor due to the actors' diametrically different understandings of these principles. In addition to that, it is necessary to lay emphasis on the difference between the official and the actual strategies of both actors. Adapted from the source document.
In this contribution, we compare the correlation of supply & demand shocks for the countries of the euro zone & the acceding countries in Central Europe. Demand & supply shocks are recovered from estimated structural VAR models of output growth & inflation in individual countries. We find that Poland & Hungary face already a comparably high similarity with the countries of the current euro zone. However, the remaining countries show still significant differences in business cycles as compared to the euro zone. This is likely to indicate that the loss of monetary sovereignty may be costly. In turn, the integration is expected to align the business cycles of these countries in the medium run. We document a similar development for the countries of the European Union in the 1990s. 4 Figures, 22 References. Adapted from the source document.
This analysis focuses on the role of the federal Europe model in the present stage of the European integration. The European Union' appropriate constitutional form primarily depends on a political decision. Such a decision must be based on democratic legitimacy conferred by political nations of the member states, & not on a delusionary conception of the European demos. If the politicians decide to continue European integration, a federal structure for European decision making must be established, with its typical features: subsidiarity & a clear division of competences. Contrary to the traditional federative models, both German & American, the European federal model cannot be based on the concept of a federal nation. The individual political nations will remain the source of its sovereignty. As a result we can talk of federal elements without a federation, or of a consociative federation without a federal state concept. Adapted from the source document.
