The article aims to present the three-level model of the EU, from the perspective of regional actors. The article analyzes the mechanisms of interaction among regional actors in reference to the level at which they are realized. Whereas the third level (regional level) is based on regional cooperation (cross-border, interregional and transnational) and regional partnership (realized by regional management), the state level and European level are based on the aggregation and articulation of regional interests. The third level follows the interest of a region. Mechanisms at the first and second levels follow the interest of a regional actor. Adapted from the source document.
The text is focused on the analysis of the position of the transitional regimes affiliated to the accession of ten new member states, which is to take place in May 2004, & its impact on the flexibility within the European Union. The text covers the historical development of the phenomenon of transitional measures, overview of the transitional measures negotiated in the current wave of enlargement & specifics of the Czech Republic in the whole process. In the historical perspective, the current transitional periods are to be compared primarily with the transitional regimes in the EU enlargements in the I980s, in particular with the accession of Spain & Portugal. Typical elements of present transitional periods are the application of the transitional periods in the very essential areas of the European integration, such as agriculture, free movement of workers & free movement of capital. Free movement of goods, in contrast, is influenced in a rather limited way. The transitional periods are internally diversified, both into internal temporal blocks followed by review of the suitability of their continuation & their application only in relation to several old member states. Specific transitional regime is the three-year-long period of enhanced regulatory powers of the European Commission in the area of internal market, & Commission's sanction powers against new member states so as to prevent the non-application of acquis in the area of the internal market & judicial cooperation. Those "horizontal" transitional periods will have -- albeit temporarily -- significant impact on the growth of the flexibility in the European Union. References. Adapted from the source document.
The study examines results of the accession negotiations of the Czech Republic to the European Union (1998-2000). The main research questions are: how to measure success or failure in the accession negotiations? Are the conditions of the Czech Republic's entry well negotiated? Why are the results of the negotiations the way they are? The study demonstrates that the abilities of negotiators influence the results of the accession negotiations. This confirms the hypothesis that negotiators' abilities, their strategy, & tactics matters in this specific & highly asymmetric negotiations, although the character of the accession negotiations would presume that those should have only minor role in the accession talks. The analysis studies the influence of the negotiators' abilities in the good results in the area of the transitional periods as well as in the relatively less successful outcomes in the financial deal. Although a direct correlation between the effective strategy/tactics & successful results as well as between the incompetent or missing strategy/tactics & unsuccessful outcomes was not found, the study proves the impact of the individual as well as collective strategy/tactics of the candidates. The Czech Republic individually, as well as in the cooperation with other candidates, achieved not only expected minor concessions but was also able to change the original position of the EU & even the EU methodology. The strategy of the Czech foreign policy towards the bilateral disputes with the member states (nuclear power Temein, Benes decrees) could influence the low sum of the future Czech income for the years 2004-2006 from the EU budget, although the resultant amount was mainly determined by the objective reasons in the distribution of the finances among the candidates. Appendixes, References. Adapted from the source document.
As a consequence of the new regionalism a marked increase in the number of regional groupings can be observed which makes the preferential relations between states even more complicated & complex. One of such complex relationships, which did not come to being during the third wave of regionalism but was strongly supported by it, is subregionalism -- simply said, overlapping of regional integrations. The aim of this comparative study is to analyze a current state & development of subregionalism within two region-wide integrations -- the European Union (EU) & the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) -- & on the basis of this analysis to compare the effects of this phenomenon in both regions. Some general conclusions enabling an assessment of future development of subregionalism & its impact on regionalism in Europe & Asia are the main outcomes of the comparison. References. Adapted from the source document.
Neoliberal institutionalism, developed by Robert Keohane, & liberal theory of international relations elaborated by Andrew Moravcsik, nowadays represent two grand International Relations (IR) theories drawing on liberalism as one of the main theoretical approaches in this discipline. However, Keohane conceived of neoliberal institutionalism as a synthesis of realism & liberalism & Moravcsik proceeds from a specific understanding of liberalism & defines liberalism by the criteria of empirical social science. This essay examines, therefore, whether neoliberal institutionalism & liberal theory indeed involve & assemble together the main ideas of liberalism. The perspective applied in the essay is based on the intellectual history of liberalism and, in this way, regards the assumptions about the most fundamental actor in international relations & about the evolution of international relations as the intellectual core of liberalism. According to liberalism, individuals & collective social actors constituted by individuals (social & bureaucratic groups) are the most fundamental actors in international relations & international relations undergo transformation, in the course of which cooperation gradually prevails over conflict. Neoliberal institutionalism considers the state to be the most fundamental actor in international relations & assumes that the nature of international relations transforms & they acquire a more cooperative character. Liberal theory claims that individuals & social groups are the most fundamental actors & that international relations undergo transformation that is marked by the growth of cooperation. Consequently, whereas neoliberal institutionalism involves the intellectual core of liberalism only to some extent, liberal theory implies that there is a grand theory that subsumes the main ideas of liberalism. Adapted from the source document.
